Whats cooking? **** Making something fine and fancy?** Just plain good? Show us!

Shop Knives and stones on ebay
Find deals on amazon
Kitchen Knife Forums

Help Support Kitchen Knife Forums:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Actually managed to be at home for lunch. Super hot here so...

unXZl5V.jpg

Wat Pro


s7nugUV.jpg


...Green apple, radish, and celery salad with a citrus-honey dressing, shredded dill Havarti, mint and sliced Black Forest ham.
 
It's been over 100F here for days and still going. Well above normal and too damned hot to be doing much cooking, especially inside!

So, I had the smoker fired up about 7am this morning.

79uYboi.jpg


Left bird was dry brined for about 20hrs and the right one I stuffed a compound herb butter under the skin and spritzed it with apple juice, cider vinegar and Fireball whiskey.

Plenty to eat for a while. :)
 
DitmasPork said:
We each follow our own path towards good health, rely on whatever sources of information is available—mine is contrary to yours regarding the validity of cholesterol numbers. TBH, although I appreciate the comment, I tend to trust my doctor, blood work, and personal knowledge with my health more than brief, bold comments on the subject on website threads. I’m choosing to avoid cholesterol medication through life style and dietary changes. It’s been an awesome challenge in the kitchen from a cook’s perspective—returning to some of the old school sensibilities of my grandparent’s cookery of minimal meat, more plants.
Click to expand...
To be fair... though I'd be very reluctant to make any definitive statements about food / cholesterol considering the dubious state of the science and the research its been based on... what he said is not entirely without merit. A lot of the mainstream advice that's being given (even by doctors that tend to follow the 'general nutritional guidelines') is based on very problematic and dubious research. None of it is experimental, and a lot of it is highly questionable once you actually dig into it. This is also why we've seen dietary advice shift so much over the last decade or two (from a sugar-industry sponsored demonization of fat to focusing more on the problems caused by too much carbs).
A lot of the 'red meat bad' recommendations seem more based on sustainability considerations than actual health considerations, and even just a dietary generalization of 'red meat' is outright oversimplistic. For example grass-fed and grain-fed beef have significantly different profiles of their fats (grassfed for example having more omega 3). The only 'red meat' that makes sense and has significant support as being bad for your health is anything containing nitrite, but that rarely gets seperated from the other red meats.

That being said; I do think that you're generally on the right track; you can't go all that wrong with simply toning down the carbs a bit and sticking to mostly proteins and veg. I would keep in mind though that within most western diets the problem isn't so much what's eaten for dinner, but everything eaten during the rest of the day.
 
Jovidah said:
To be fair... though I'd be very reluctant to make any definitive statements about food / cholesterol considering the dubious state of the science and the research its been based on... what he said is not entirely without merit. A lot of the mainstream advice that's being given (even by doctors that tend to follow the 'general nutritional guidelines') is based on very problematic and dubious research. None of it is experimental, and a lot of it is highly questionable once you actually dig into it. This is also why we've seen dietary advice shift so much over the last decade or two (from a sugar-industry sponsored demonization of fat to focusing more on the problems caused by too much carbs).
A lot of the 'red meat bad' recommendations seem more based on sustainability considerations than actual health considerations, and even just a dietary generalization of 'red meat' is outright oversimplistic. For example grass-fed and grain-fed beef have significantly different profiles of their fats (grassfed for example having more omega 3). The only 'red meat' that makes sense and has significant support as being bad for your health is anything containing nitrite, but that rarely gets seperated from the other red meats.

That being said; I do think that you're generally on the right track; you can't go all that wrong with simply toning down the carbs a bit and sticking to mostly proteins and veg. I would keep in mind though that within most western diets the problem isn't so much what's eaten for dinner, but everything eaten during the rest of the day.
Click to expand...
Cheers. Appreciate the comment. I'm aware of many of the arguments regarding cholesterol, etc. Fact is I've gotta put my trust somewhere—and that is with my doctor, who I don't want to start second guessing. I'm generally quite health savvy regarding how I eat and cook.
 
Jovidah said:
To be fair... though I'd be very reluctant to make any definitive statements about food / cholesterol considering the dubious state of the science and the research its been based on... what he said is not entirely without merit. A lot of the mainstream advice that's being given (even by doctors that tend to follow the 'general nutritional guidelines') is based on very problematic and dubious research. None of it is experimental, and a lot of it is highly questionable once you actually dig into it. This is also why we've seen dietary advice shift so much over the last decade or two (from a sugar-industry sponsored demonization of fat to focusing more on the problems caused by too much carbs).
A lot of the 'red meat bad' recommendations seem more based on sustainability considerations than actual health considerations, and even just a dietary generalization of 'red meat' is outright oversimplistic. For example grass-fed and grain-fed beef have significantly different profiles of their fats (grassfed for example having more omega 3). The only 'red meat' that makes sense and has significant support as being bad for your health is anything containing nitrite, but that rarely gets seperated from the other red meats.

That being said; I do think that you're generally on the right track; you can't go all that wrong with simply toning down the carbs a bit and sticking to mostly proteins and veg. I would keep in mind though that within most western diets the problem isn't so much what's eaten for dinner, but everything eaten during the rest of the day.
Click to expand...
it was NOT the science nor the research that was flawed but the decision making unfluenced by lobbying...Red meat was identified bit cholesterol was made the scape goat.

statins do lower cholesterol, yet it;s the LDL to HDL ratio that matters and there are far betters ways to improve that.
 
MarcelNL said:
it was NOT the science nor the research that was flawed but the decision making unfluenced by lobbying...Red meat was identified bit cholesterol was made the scape goat.

statins do lower cholesterol, yet it;s the LDL to HDL ratio that matters and there are far betters ways to improve that.
Click to expand...
Considering virtually all human nutritional research is not experimental I'd say it's pretty damn flawed. I know there's good ethical reasons for how things are done, but too many conclusions are being drawn from data that simply does not lend itself to drawing proper conclusions. For the same reason I'd also be extremely hesistant myself to say what people should or shouldn't eat; I think we have to be realistic about how modest our knowledge is.
Although I admit that it's usually the media / lobbyists that tend to run with any data and vastly overstate anything originally said in any articles.
Admittedly the worst are the industry giants trying to make easy money under the guise of doing something healthy. The main companies peddling the stettins and 'healthy fats' are the same ones peddling cubes of transfat 20 years ago 'because butter is bad'. It's like Germans and gas; the story always ends badly. ;)
 
no red meat or statins here, but most certainly not health food.

Raspberry lemonade cookies. Slightly chewy, slightly pillowy, very bright from the lemon juice and zest, with bursts of raspberry flavor. Delicious.

Also some brownie cookies with whole raspberries replacing chocolate chips, just because. They may look like something produced by a couple of birds my better half and I rescued, but luckily they don’t taste that way. Dense. Fudgey (auto correct says this is not a word. I disagree with my robotic censor.) Chewy. The flavor is of chocolate covered raspberries naturally, and excellent, Next time I’ll experiment with adding some lemon zest to heighten the fruit flavors, and maybe some espresso powder to deepen the chocolate
 

Attachments

  • image.jpg
    image.jpg
    2.6 MB · Views: 0
HumbleHomeCook said:
@Naftoor Raspberry lemonade cookies???!!! That sounds amazing!
Click to expand...


They’re definitely added to our recipe book, a very refreshing cookie flavor this lovely heat as god turns his microwave to max power and attempts to cook us.

I think I’ll try and tweak a sugar cookie recipe for my next crack at it. This recipe ended up with a cake like texture. The closest I think to it would be madeleines, without the crust. I prefer my cookies with a bit of chew to them personally.
 
Sachertorte for my 80th b-day, made and ineptly piped by yours truly. (You're supposed to pipe "Sacher" but even "80" taxed my skills to the limit. Yummy cake, though. Apricot glaze home made by reconstituting incredibly good dried cots from Bella Viva Farms in the Central Valley.)
 

Attachments

  • cake 80.jpg
    cake 80.jpg
    1.5 MB · Views: 0
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Back
Top